FPS's of 2009

So here are my thoughts on last years FPS releases

1. Modern Warfare 2
2.ODST
3.Killzone 2
4. Resistance 2 (that might have actually been the year before)
5. Wolfenstein
6. Fear 2

Special mention for Fallout 3, which I actually enjoyed more than all of these, but is technically not a traditional FPS.

ModWar2 was a shoe in for top shooter, though I think ODST, KZ2 and Resistance all put up admirable fights. However, MODWAR2 had an extremely short campaign and a multiplayer experience that has some serious issues in terms of balancing. In many ways, the game was simply an online expansion pack, though the campaign was the most legit one I'd played that year.

ODST was something new. For most Halo fans, that was shocking, as the formula hasn't changed since Halo 2 aside from deployable items and a few new vehicles/weapons. ODST just plays differently. I played it back to back with Halo 3, and the dynamics were incredibly different. That being said, it is amazing that ODST plays as well as it does. A game like ODST shouldn't be fun. In fact, it should be sluggish and frustrating- but instead its engaging, challenging, and best of all- entertaining. It was a landmark in the series, and I doubt Reach will be able to touch it (especially after playing the Reach beta). Also- Firefight- freaking amazing. Get four players together and play it. You'll understand what I mean.

Killzone 2 was everything Sony has taught us to expect. Beautiful, challenging, and slick. Killzone 2 was possibly the strongest direct competitor against MODWAR2, as it was the only other entry into the mass-warfare category that year. One thing I noticed about KZ2's online play as I revisited it the other day is that most matches play out as massively chaotic battles, a feeling that MODWAR2 lacks. However, with no weapon customization and few class choices, the game starts to lose its replayability. However- a major plus- there's tons of DLC. I'd recommend checking out the game. It's actually fairly solid.

Resistance 2- First off- this isn't a multiplayer game- don't let the co-op option fool you. You'll just be frustrated. Instead- think of this as like...The Empire Strikes Back of the series. Think I'm joking? Just try it. Now granted, Resistance (the original) was no A New Hope, but the way Resistance 2 improves is damn near inspired (just like Empire was). The weapons have been retooled, the levels are all freaking gorgeous (the burning san francisco is possibly the most beautiful sight ive ever seen on my ps3, and I've played MGS4). The physics have finally been tied down and the game just feels original, as opposed to the first which felt like a really cheap halo clone. Every gun has its place, every character has an interesting story, and the game's protagonist, Nathan Hale, has the potential to become Sony's Master Chief (though that sadly may be impossible). The game's campaign is simply epic. I was in love with every second of it. That being said- if I had to give an award to the best campaign- I might give it to this one. Where MODWAR 2's campaign was like a gritty Ridley Scott movie, this game played like a cross between Blade Runner and a Wachowskie brothers film. Possibly the best post-apocalyptic experience I've had aside from Fallout 3. That being said...the campaign only goes so far- yes, its long and wonderfully epic...but after about 3 playthroughs you start wondering why the multiplayer couldn't be nearly as fun...

Wolfenstein- You have to make a decision when playing Wolfenstein to not take it seriously. I mean, this is ID. These guys made a living off of making tongue in cheek games like Wolfenstein and Doom. The main issue here, however, is that Wolfenstein takes itself seriously after the first...two hours, which is a shame. If ID stuck with the tongue in cheek approach, this could have been far more enjoyable. Instead we get magic medallions and hard-boiled characters and few if any taglines (though we still are treated to "Get Psyched!" during the load screens). Yes, there is still treasure. Yes, all the weapons are upgradeable. Yes, there are mecha-nazis. However, the campaign stalls out half way through. That being said- this game is tied with FEAR 2 for the best opening sequence of last year. Fighting in that train yard with vats of zero-g goo exploding and watching nazis and debris alike suddenly start floating in air was nothing short of delightful. However, the further the game goes on, the less exciting things get. Environments blend together, characters go flat, and the skirmishes in the street become tiresome old exercises. I never tried the multiplayer, however. Maybe that was better? Word of advice ID- next time- cut the medallion, and just give us some bread and butter combat that's accompanied by more of those sick cut scenes, like the one you had at the start of the game.

FEAR 2- I never played the original- but it was supposedly amazing. FEAR 2 starts off as a slick, smart, and highly stylized shooter. In fact, the action is so fast paced that my pulse literally quickened the first few minutes playing it. However, then I was introduced to the bullet time effects. Cool at first- then it becomes a crutch. The game ceases to be challenging with it. What could have been a game filled with fast paced firefights quickly turned into a routine "hit the square button, kill as many peeps as possible, then hide, wait for it to refill, and then repeat" kind of game. However- FEAR 2 was the first time I was freaked out in a game since Doom3, which is saying something. I screamed like a girl the first time I turned around and Alma was right behind me. It also had some stunning visuals, though the genome army still doesn't strike me as an interesting enemy to fight. At least Id's over-stylized Nazis were tongue in cheek. It's like the guys who made this game didn't even try think up an interesting stock foot soldier. Multiplayer was somewhat fun, though it got quickly overshadowed by both KZ 2 and MODWAR 2. The campaign was also a one time deal. Pretty much a straightforward on the rail shooter with no chance to affect the plot. From the looks of the next game, that might change- but if Wolfenstein has proved anything- its that when a shooter tries to become more than what it is really meant to be, it almost always fails- and FEAR 3 looks to be reaching to do just that. Oh well. Best of luck to them.


Anywho- those are my thoughts on the major fps's that I played, 1 being my fav, 6 being my least fav.

That list is pretty solid. I agree with MW2 for sure. However, I stopped playing when I was leading in kills with nothing but tactical and throwing knives.

I like games that are fun to watch as E-sports; therefore, not FPS. You see one guy who can pull a headshot in under 0.5 seconds, you've seen every game on every engine.

It seems that with games, you are interested in these aspects:

-Graphics
-Epicness of the story
-Compelling characters
-Realism

So really, an interactive movie. You've got some elements of gameplay in there, but I'm thinking for the most part, you're preoccupied with the story. There's nothing wrong with that, I get the urge to follow an interactive story on certain occasions.

But for the most part, here's what is important;

-Gameplay
-Fun
-Multiplay
-Oppurtunities to outwit, spank, and outright embarrass other real people

My meaningless post here is just my way of saying that I have nothing to contribute to this subject, as I HATE FPS. As far as gameplay is concerned, it is all the same thing.

I'm still quite enjoying KZ2's multiplayer but I haven't unlocked quite everything yet. After I do I don't know if I'll keep playing or not. Blastin people in the face with that shotgun is just about the best thing ever though...

I haven't played any of the other games for a substantial amount of time.

Honestly, my favourite genre is not FPS either, but I'm giving credit where credit is due as far as Killzone and MW2 are concerned. It was a nice break from people playing Halo all the time.

Rat wrote:

I like games that are fun to watch as E-sports; therefore, not FPS. You see one guy who can pull a headshot in under 0.5 seconds, you've seen every game on every engine.

It seems that with games, you are interested in these aspects:

-Graphics
-Epicness of the story
-Compelling characters
-Realism

So really, an interactive movie. You've got some elements of gameplay in there, but I'm thinking for the most part, you're preoccupied with the story. There's nothing wrong with that, I get the urge to follow an interactive story on certain occasions.

But for the most part, here's what is important;

-Gameplay
-Fun
-Multiplay
-Oppurtunities to outwit, spank, and outright embarrass other real people

My meaningless post here is just my way of saying that I have nothing to contribute to this subject, as I HATE FPS. As far as gameplay is concerned, it is all the same thing.

I totally agree- gameplay and multiplay are huge ones- (and fun of course)- i think i addressed multiplayer in each of the games- some had it (the top three at least), some did not (the bottom 3). Gameplay was also tied directly into it. I mean, each of these six games had decent play- otherwise I would have said otherwise. Though the biggest issue with these games is the controls- I personally believe that COD has the perfect control system, followed by Halo. Every other game on that list doesn't come close (except for Wolfenstein). I think controls have a direct correlation on how fun the gameplay is.
As for your final factor- I would simply venture this- I am not good at CODMODWAR2. In fact, I'm really bad. This is kind of sayin something, considering I tend to kick ass on localized multiplayer- but now at the high tiers I rarely break even on my kd ratio. It's bad. That all being said- you have to have legit skill and and intelligence to actually succeed on the high tiers of COD, and I'd even propose that the same is true on Killzone 2. Leave the braindead tactics to Halo (though that was somewhat abolished with ODST, and in theory, with REACH).

As to story- I think FPS's have had an obligation to be something more than what they were ever since Half Life, which proved that games can have intricate gameplay, be scary and gory as hell, and still say something more than your average Unreal Tournament deathmatch. Since then, games like Star Wars: Jedi Outcast, Red Faction, Doom 3, Ghost Recon, Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, Half Life 2, Left 4 Dead (to a lesser extent) and every game on this list has managed to either meet this bar, or at least come close.
For me- I have no interest in the deathmatch age of fps that once dominated the scene (Quake 3, Unreal Tournament, 007 Goldeneye, Tribes 2, MAG). I demand something with an epic story, compelling characters, and solid reasons to back up the action taking place- part of that is the theatre major in me demanding for something more artistic, the other part of that is because I feel the genre is moving upwards and onwards, and that every game is a reflection of a genre once called "degenerate and brainless". If a game can't speak to me beyond its violence, (and this goes for any genre), if it can't engage me with a story, I want no part of it. Hence, I'm very, very choosy, as some can tell. Part of that also, is graphics. If Fallout 3 couldn't make me believe I was really wondering the DC ruins, it wouldn't be half as engaging.
In summation, I'd like to point out while yes all I mentioned is quite important, gameplay is still at the core. A game can have the best story in the world, but if its gameplay stinks, why should I give it another shot?
(Perfect example- Dragonage- yes, I enjoyed it- but it's gameplay caused significant damage to the fun factor)

Dragonage's story was somewhat lackluster, in my opinion. Upon looking back at it, I really only loved that game because it had nice boss fights, which I guess is alright, because who doesn't love a great boss fight. I think the D&D fantatic in me screams for that classic formula: grunts+thinking+mini boss+more grunts+boss+reward=entertaining everytime. Just mix up the skins and abilities and you have a top notch adventure.

I'm very excited for Killzone 3

You mean Killzone 3d?

but really, are any of us ever going to even see it in 3d?

I'm certainly not going to see it in 3d. I just want to die a lot while trying to use a jetpack

exactly, i know i won't be upgrading to a 3d tv within the next few years, so it's just killzone 3 for me

im really hoping 3d is just a bad fad, like it was in the 70s....or was it 80s? when were 3d movies last a big deal?>

pretty much every decade since the red and blue glasses were around.

that's a damn lie